- Joined
- Jul 15, 2005
- Messages
- 28,134
- Reaction score
- 15,023
- Location
- Canada's Capital
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
You can believe what you want to believe - as I said, the Chretien government's position on Iraq did indeed play a part in the demise of Chretien and then the Liberal government. Was it the sole cause? - No - and I never claimed it was.
our claim that millions from coast-to-coast marched against it is utter nonsense and I defy you to point out any credible source that would support such a claim.
adian public eventually tired of our role in Afghanistan and pushed for withdrawal but except for a few of the usual professional protestors and union operatives (often one and the same) few Canadians got overly worked up about the war in Iraq, even years after the fact when the rationale for entering Iraq became questionable.
What's all this "10 year" bull****? The conflict in Iraq started in 1991 under Bush Sr, not 2003 under Bush Jr. Talk about getting your facts wrong, you're 12 years off.Gee Paul, tell us something we didn't know already.
The former deputy Pentagon chief, Paul Wolfowitz, a driving force behind the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, has conceded that a series of blunders by George W. Bush’s administration plunged Iraq into a cycle of violence that “spiralled out of control”.
In an interview with The Sunday Times to mark the 10th anniversary of the Iraq invasion, he said there “should have been Iraqi leadership from the beginning”, rather than a 14-month occupation led by an American viceroy and based on “this idea that we’re going to come in like [General Douglas] MacArthur in Japan and write the constitution for them”.
He accepted that too many Iraqis were excluded by a programme to purge members of the ruling Ba’ath party, that the dissolution of the Iraqi army was botched and that the “biggest hole” in post-war planning was not to anticipate the possibility of an insurgency.
“The most consequential failure was to understand the tenacity of Saddam’s regime,” he said.
Wolfowitz, 69, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington since he stepped down as World Bank president in 2007, has a somewhat diffident manner but he became animated as he reflected on the lead-up to the invasion and its aftermath.
Read more: 10 Years On, Paul Wolfowitz Admits U.S. Bungled in Iraq | RealClearPolitics
Follow us: @RCP_Articles on Twitterm
If anything, his decision to not go bolstered his image and reputation, not the other way around.
D'uh, you're right. Brain fart on my part. I meant to write thousands. After all, we're a pretty small population.
The news today has Canadian quite proud of the fact that we did not participate. I was mostly not a fan of the Chretien government, but have to give them big kudos on this.
What's all this "10 year" bull****? The conflict in Iraq started in 1991 under Bush Sr, not 2003 under Bush Jr. Talk about getting your facts wrong, you're 12 years off.
...and therefore this is not the 10th anniversary, we're nearing the 22nd anniversary. Talk about media ****-ups.It started then, but Bush I, unlike Junior, had the good sense to send Hussain packing out of Kuwait and then go home. Junior had to double down with a decade plus nation building project.
...and therefore this is not the 10th anniversary, we're nearing the 22nd anniversary. Talk about media ****-ups.
Nope, we were already in Iraq. We didn't invade ****, we were already inside the country for 12 years by this point, enforcing the no-fly zone, conducting ground missions, all of it...for 12 ****ing years.but it is the tenth anniversary of the invasion.
The Canadian public's position on Iraq has been a changing/evolving one and I agree with you that now most Canadians are pleased we did not actively participate. But at the time it was not so clear and many favored participation.
Nope, we were already in Iraq. We didn't invade ****, we were already inside the country for 12 years by this point, enforcing the no-fly zone, conducting ground missions, all of it...for 12 ****ing years.
We were in Iraq for longer than we were in Afghanistan, and we're still in Afghanistan.
Change the bolded to "some" and I'll agree with you.
And that first occurred in 1991. They decided to halt, and we played silly-games for 12 years, but the invasion didn't begin in 2003. The invasion ended in 2003.OK, if you say so. Sure, we did have some people in Iraq, but sending the troops across the border with the goal of deposing the government sure looked like an invasion to me.
Actually, before the invasion, while Canada was still working with the US and Britian to get the UN to sanction the action, a majority of Canadians approved - the lone exception being Quebec where they oppose any Canadian action anywhere.
Ahhh... 71% of Canadian disapproved.
Again, this poll was taken before the invasion began March 19, 2003 and was reflective of Canadians general preference to be part of a UN sanctioned invasion of Iraq, not a US led invasion.
What's all this "10 year" bull****? The conflict in Iraq started in 1991 under Bush Sr, not 2003 under Bush Jr. Talk about getting your facts wrong, you're 12 years off.
You're citing only one operation within the conflict. The conflict was on-going for 12 years with enforcement of the no-fly zone and spec ops missions.GHWB accomplished the task he said we needed to, which was to kick Saddam's ass out of Kuwait. It was over in just 100 days. Ten years ago, his son restarted the conflict on March 20, 2003 with Shock 'N Awe.
Only one maybe, but it caused almost 4500 of our brave servicemen their lives.You're citing only one operation within the conflict. The conflict was on-going for 12 years with enforcement of the no-fly zone and spec ops missions.
Mhmm....at this point you should be more worried about the fact that those special war powers are still in the President's possession. Congress has don nothing to take those powers back. Any president can still do whatever they want with the military without further Congressional authorization.Only one maybe, but it caused almost 4500 of our brave servicemen their lives.
And that first occurred in 1991. They decided to halt, and we played silly-games for 12 years, but the invasion didn't begin in 2003. The invasion ended in 2003.
It may also interest you to know that the modern 'war on terror' began in the 70s when Iran took American hostages.
#history
I haven't seen argo yet but I like how obama tried to use it for cover over lybia.According to ARGO, and as history shows, it actually began when our CIA overthrew the democratically elected Mossadegh.
At no point in the article does Wolfowitz say that invasion was the wrong choice.
I haven't seen argo yet but I like how obama tried to use it for cover over lybia.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?